FlightMan

[QUOTE=RB5 Paul]I'm with spoon on this one,teach your kids that if they run in the road and hit a lump of metal moving at xxmph it's gonna do more damage to them than it is to the metal,unfortunatly i can't help with this argument as i am a stereotypical non child having adult .

You say you dont have kids, well as someone who does, let me try and explain what its like.
As someone with kids let me try and explain to you what its like. You tell them about the dangers of roads. You explain what will happen if they get hit by a car. I showed my 5 year old what happens to a nice juicy red apple when it gets run over by a car. I explained that it can't be put back together again, etc. But i dont trust her, because she is 5 years old.
4 months ago, walking back from school with my daughter, and another kid who was playing with a ball. He was bouncing it as he walked along with his mum and me. Well, it bounced into the road, and he jumped off the pavement to get it.
Now, there were no cars running, he got his ball back. And a b0llocking from his mum. ( who has given him the road safety lecture )

Why did he do it? Because he is a kid! Kids do not think like you and me. If its our ball, we think, ***** gone/ROAD/NO CARS/get it. Kids think
***** gone/get it. Sometimes they're lucky, other times they aint.

Its all about responsibility. We all have a responsibility to drive sensibly, particularly in urban areas, especially near schools. I have a responsibility to teach my children to be safe when walking across or by roads. When my daughter can spell responsibility, I'll expect her to act accordingly, at all times. Even when her ball bounces into the road. Until that time, she's vulnerable. Fact of life. I accept it.

I take my responsibilities seriously.

Do you?

Diablo

For someone who appears quite intelligent Tiggs, you don't half spout some crap sometimes

Whether I have kids or not is immaterial. Most of my friends do, and their kids (where they are young) are supervised, or play in enclosed gardens.

Its called being a responsible parent. They all accept the responsibilities of being a responsible parent, which include looking after your kids.

We live in a nice area, on what amounts to a cresecent. There are 3, 4 and 5 year olds playing on the road all the time. Unsupervised, and out of the sightline of their parents.

They are nice kids, but have no road sense whatsoever and its only a matter of time before one of them gets run over.

And not because the cars are travelling too fast (the traffic calming means that is not possible anyway), but because some of them seem to think there is nothing wrong with aiming their scooters, etc at you as you drive (slowly) along the road.

Its just the same old issue, some parents appear to think that its up to the rest of the world to look out for their kids......



When I was a kid, I didn't play on the road.

Diablo

yes, and the kids mum had the responsibility to appreciate that a bounced ball was more than likely to roll into the road.

that incident happened because the mum in question should have known better.

its hardly rocket science.....

^Qwerty^

So long as they are not breaking the speed limit when they run over the kids, it won't matter. (at least that's the way current driver education is going)

Diablo

LOL

Of course not.

If the kids in question are properly supervised they won't get run over in the first place.

FlightMan

You don't have kids do you.

What about the time when a ball comes bouncing out of nowhere and a kid runs after it? I've seen it happen. What should a parent do, chain a kid to his/her legs?

fast bloke

Aren't you the lucky one that the guy in the car you ran out in front of was going slow enough not to kill you? - Your story illustrates my point - with the best will in the world, it is impossible to control kids completely 24/7. It would be nice if the people who actually understand the potential outcome of of a kid/car collision would behave responsibly. My kids now understand this, and behave appropriately. Unfortunately the tosser next door is either too stupid to understand it, or too irresponsible to care

Diablo

That is really down to where the "nowhere" in your example is.

If kids are playing safely in enclosed gardens, they won't be able to simply run after it. Having to negotiate a fence, gate or whatever gives the driver time to react to the ball in the first place, in the knowledge that someone small may well shortly follow.

If the kids are playing in an area that is open to the road, or indeed railway or any other area of danger, they should be appropriately supervised.

Would you let your kids play by a sheer cliff face? or by a pool or the sea without supervision?

No need for chains mate, just a bit of common sense.

Diablo

Ah, that old chestnut.....

Bollox.

If you cannot supervise them (and we are talking young kids here) they should not be in a position where they can run onto a road.

How difficult is that?

OllyK

Or he could have been travelling at, or in excess of the speed limit, but happened to be sufficiently observant to see the young spoon near the road and have anticipated that he "may" run out in front. I'd rather have somebody doing 30mph with brain engaged than doing 15mph in auto pilot. Speed is a variable not an absolute, adjust it according to the conditions, it's that simple.

Diablo

Good point well made Olly.

pvtbanner

Thats plain stupidity on the part of the parents. I have children and realise you cant supervise them at all times but I never ever let them out onto the street when they were 5. They are 7 and 9 now and I still like to be in eyesight of what of what they are doing if they are out there. I dont always trust my kids to be responsible and do my utmost to keep them out of situations they could get into harms way. Likewise as a driver I dont trust kids and adjust my speed accordingly when in built up areas. 20mph is plenty fast enough in a residential area.
That said I was on my way to get a haircut with my lad last week. We crossed a one way road nothing was coming. It comes out at a busy junction in Burton near the train station. Anyway some fcukwit came right across the junction and straight down the one way road the wrong way. Its was bloody close to squishing both of us. I can only hope that my lad took something from this as he normally walks round as though he's indestructable.
Sometimes though it takes an accident to show you how complacent you can get. I hit a motorcyclist turning into a junction 3 years ago. It was terrible, all my fault but my drivers awareness has improved immensley because of it.

Tiggs

lol.....what a load of crap!

Leslie

I hope I am wrong, but I get the impression that some people are trying to justify driving driving unecessarily fast in residential streets!

Surely it is not too much to ask that people slow down in such areas to less than the posted speed limit just in case a child or an elderly person who may be deaf walks in to the road.

Is it really so important to drive on the limit at all times?

Les

OllyK

I hope you are too, but on the other hand it would also seem that some people are trying to absolve pedestrians and parents from any responsibility for making sure the road is clear before they or their kids step in to it - Green Cross Code and all that. BOTH sides need to be responsible here!

Dracoro

It'd not really that relevant if parents look after their kids properly or not. The fact of the matter is, if you run a kid over and do some serious injury or worse in a residential cul-de-sac you are clearly not driving appropriately.

Personally I always take greater care in these sort of places as I have no control over a) the kids, b) no control over the parent who can't or won't take extra precautions etc. BUT I CAN control my driving.

Diablo

Really?

So you recon that a ball being held responsibly by "mum" whilst walking along the pavement is no less likely to bounce into the street than a ball being bounced by the child along that same pavement?

You really are an **** tiggs

Spoon

Too many posts here have been cross pollinated and as always what certain individuals are saying gets quoted incorrectly further up the thread.

It's quite common to see on a lot of threads that some people don't actually read what is being said but interpret it as what they think is being said.

OllyK

Excuse me?? Sure You have to take responsibility for you and your actions, but parents have to take responsibility for their kids and their actions otherwise we will have a load of uneducated people about who balme everybody else for thier self inflicted misfortune....oh, hold on a minute...

OllyK

Well of course, how else can you have a good row, with out mis-interpreting what other people have posted

douglasb

Not necessarily. My street isn't a cul-de-sac but isn't really a through road either. The only traffic is people who live in the street or vistors.

On one side of the street the houses are above road level and have upwards slpoing driveways. Houses on the other side are either at street level or lower.

A couple of months ago, I was driving along (at around 15mph) and noticed a large van parked on the upwards sloping side of the street. Just before I passed the van a girl about 4 years old came flying out from behind the van on her bike. She'd obviously been riding down the driveway to build up speed and hadn't been able to stop before flying out into the road. I stopped.

Had I been about a second further along the road she'd have ridden into the side of the car. It wouldn't have mattered if I was only doing 5mph; had I been at that spot when she came onto the road she would have hit the side of my car. I accept that if she came out in front of me and I hadn't been able to stop in time due to my speed then I wouldn't have been driving appropriately, but not every accident involving kids in residential streets involves inappropriate driving.

Tiggs

your whole attitude on this sucks......areas of dense housing are for people to live in......roads to those houses (unless they have big walls on either side) need to be driven down with a LOT of attention paid to the fact that you are in a people place.

at the end of the day it doesnt really matter...i live in a place where my kids can play because its free from *****....and you have no kids to practice your "style" of responsible parenting on.

Apparition

Spoon : To answer this part of your comments ; Then there's the supermarkets. Sometimes you can't even park your car for families walking in front. at the side and behind your car, all at once!! They don't think to let cars park then pass, or low and behold walk down the pedestrian walkways provided (most of the time). No, they'd rather surround you so that you are forced to hold everything up just to save running over someone................
Many supermarkets do not buld their car parks with sufficient walk ways for pedestrians. Therefore they are wont to wander like lost sheep for lack of specified pavements.

vindaloo

J4CKO,

If you've already had a word with the Homewatch or neighbourhood watch guy, does he do a fact sheet or similar? Ours do an A4 document of what's been happening every so often and the odd 'alert' sheet if the Police pass on any extra info. It wouldn't be too much bother to add a cautionary word or two regarding speeding in the cul-de-sac and coming from a 'community figure' isn't likely to p*ss anyone off.

If you feel that strongly about it, video the area of road in question and let everyone know it. That way, if there is an accident then they'll know that there will be an independent source of evidence.

J.

SiPie

As a former proud member of the tufty club, I considered myself pretty up on the latest road safety info ...

....so years later into adulthood, it was much to my disappointment that whilst waiting patiently for funds at a Royal Bank Cashline machine with some mates in my local towns Pedestrian precinct, a spotty teenager (who it turns out had passed his test only 8 days previously), in his Dad's Cavalier, came round a sharp right-hander in the rain with the back-end of the car hanging out.....

Witness and police reports estimated that he was doing circa 60mph (30 limit).

He couldn't regain control of the car, mounted a pavement removing 3 concrete bollards, carried on straight onto the edge of the Pedestrian precinct, the car hit me and I was chucked 8 feet into the air (witness estimates not mine), landing on my head...

Bruising to my legs, one broken toe and a fractured skull later

£1,022 compensation paid to my good self and spotty driver charged with careless driving. Headaches to this day (15 years ago) and plenty scarring on the old face and forehead to remind me.

The moral....

Dunno really... Ban all Cavaliers ?

In all seriousness, educating kids helps but it didn't do me alot of good

OllyK

I suppose the points are:
1) you can't be sure you will be safe on the pavement so why make things worse by wandering about on the road?
2) We need better driver training, possibly combined with vehicle power restrictions for new drivers.

SiPie

Agreed Olly

It's surely a combination....

Educate the kids as much as possible and equally importantly educate (and I appreciate that some are too thick to even try and educate ) the drivers...

It was drilled into me as I was learning to drive, that I was in charge of over a tonne of lethal weapon that easily kills people when used incorrectly.

Spoon

Notice the highlighted text! I said most of the time.

The rest you say would require translation though.

Diablo

I find your assesment quite interesting Tiggs.

And I'm not suggesting for one minute that the motorists should do anything other than take extreme care in such situations. If your view of my posts had not been blinkered with your "he doesn't have kids so what does he know" attitude you may have seen that.

Its amusing how many parents hide behind the "its impossible to look after them" line, instead of admitting that they eithet can't cope, or don't want to committ their lives to having to cope.

Its quite telling that of all the species, humans generally exhibit some of the poorer degrees of care for their young.

I digress. So what part of my attitude sucks exactly? The part where I'm calling on parents to take a more responsible attitude to the welfare of their kids?

The part where I'm suggesting that not to be aware of your surroundings is unacceptable? The part where I'm askin for parents to take more care?

LOL...as they say, "whatever"

I can only talk form personal experience. From what I witness first hand on a daily basis.

And its not that densely populated an area.

When, and its not when but if, one of the kids around us gets run over It will not be the motorists fault. Nor will it be an accident. For it to be an accident, that would suggest it could not have been avoided.

I'm happy for you that your environment allows your kids that degree of security that you can allow your responsibilities to slip. Because with your attitude, they would probably be dead in what, to most, is their environment.

Or is it just easier to stick your head in the sand and say its someone else's fault?

fast bloke

Diablo - you generally talk a fair bit of sense and see to be reasonably intelligent. However - sometimes you talk complete ****e. This is one of those occasions